|Page 1 of 57:||          |
|Index||565 reviews in total|
The usual quota of "surface reviews" here. Are we living in a totally
one-dimensional society these days that has no time now for unsupported
fantasy - "Just the facts Ma'am, Just the facts!"
We have here an adult fairytale no less, yet what do I read (and I include paid media critics here) but absurd negative comments such as "How did McConaughey and his intrepid band of marines come up with the fuel to cross the atlantic?" "Why are the children seemingly so well fed in a period of pestilence?" "Where does the seemingly limitless fuel come from?" etc etc. Who CARES????????? this is a DRAGON fantasy for God sakes! Someone want to set up a Government enquiry as to why fairies speak English? the possibility that Humpty Dumpty had a middle-ear infection? Perhaps the Easter Bunny has some communicable diseases that he should be tested for?
Ok REIGN OF FIRE is not up there with other sci-fi classics and the marketing department should be answering charges of misrepresentation for that poster showing an aerial armada of helicopters battling the fire-breathing beasties over central London - that just never happens but I gotta tell you REIGN OF FIRE has some of the greatest set designs and cinematography I have ever seen. It is extremely interesting to LOOK at from a technical viewpoint. The dragons themselves make the least interesting contribution to the film and except for the final confrontation which almost "gets there" they are really secondary to the film itself. If you were to actually record the amount of dragon "screen time" I doubt it would be 18 minutes....and most of them are not far off laughable. Curiously, that aspect alone should have wrecked it for me...but it didn't - I found the "wasteland asharamas" totally credible and involving.
I thought the much maligned McConaughey's role not without interest. Still haven't worked out whether or not "Mad Matt" was supposed to be some hybrid creation - part Patton, part Maximus, part Captain Ahab or just all "grunt." He certainly handled his last solo flight with flair and derring-do. Basil Rathbone himself never swung a meaner sword! Christian Bale replete with his best "know wot I mean" brit accent was pretty good I thought as Quinn the reluctant colony leader. What I couldn't believe is how the years have treated Izabella Scorupco the most beautiful Bond girl I ever saw (GOLDENEYE). I realise that a decade of fighting dragons and close-contact aeriel combat takes a lot out of a girl but she looked 20 years older! I would never have recognised her. Totally shattered an illusion I have maintained of her. If she said "Boys with Toys" now, I think I'd need a double vodka-martini!
But I digress. The dragon fx were just so-so, they saved the best for last sensibly. The script had its moments but the production work and set-design were simply awesome...SO good in fact, the rest of the film really didn't matter! Overall I would bequeath it a 6.9. Worth seeing if one is prepared to watch it in the spirit that it was made.
This was a bit different than one expected. There was no nonsense, no
tongue-in-cheek humor or special-effects just for the sake of it: this
was simply a humans vs. dragons story taking place in the future. No
laughs and nothing hokey, which is what I expected. They played it
straight, simply as a fight story between the two parties.
Yes, there were credibility problems with the story but overall, it was good escapist adventure. The dragons were realistic-looking, the scenery dreary but the story interesting and intense in spots.
I wouldn't buy it, but I would definitely recommend it if you are looking for a night of adventure on film. You could do a whole lot worse, especially with two young actors who have arrived as stars: Christian Bale and Matthew McConnaughey.
Seems like I'm in a minority enjoying this one! It amazes me that so many people are quick to put the boot in to this (admittedly) silly but entertaining b-grade post-apocalyptic thriller yet line up to watch the absolutely awful and overblown Star Wars movies. Yes, I said b-grade, because despite the budget being close to $100 million, that's exactly what it is, a b-grade sci fi movie, no more, no less. Fans of Roy Ward Baker's 'Quatermass and the Pit', Larry Cohen's 'Q: The Winged Serpent' and Tobe Hooper's 'Lifeforce', all of which 'Reign Of Fire' reminded me of at various points, will enjoy this one more than the Blockbuster crowd. Christian Bale ('American Psycho') and Matthew McConaughey ('Frailty') are both pretty good as the leader of an underground community and a hardass military man respectively, who both have different approaches to their shared problem - the ongoing threat of dragon attacks. Yes, in this future dragons are real and have devastated the world, and only a handful of human survivors exist. Once you can accept that premise, and some of the "scientific" explanations for the why and wherefores of the dragons, you're in for a wild ride. No-one's gonna argue this is a great movie, but it's a lot of fun, and I recommend it, especially with beer and pizza.
Sure, it was cheesy and low budget, but
the indomitable Rob Bowman didn't pull any
punches in this futuristic drama about dragons.
Giving a scientific edge to a creature based in
fantasy, this film proved to be a rather refreshing
step in science fiction, which means it won't
be a well received one. Even if this film barely
makes its money back, at least it leaves the
door open for other fantastic ideas in the science
As for the film, the technical side was excellent. Bowman, a former television director proves he can do just as well with a 50 million dollar budget (?) and a tough to sell idea. Both Christian Bale and Matthew McConaughey were believable as care taking heroes. Their bipolar dynamic was especially excellent, creating tension not just in beliefs but also in culture and devotion to country. McConaughey was especially good as Van Zant (which was well cast, considering he is an actual southerner), bringing a role to his resume which I had never seen. All in all, a decent film to watch. 7/10
I love this film. It shows the very human struggle to survive after
they've been knocked from the top of the food chain. It blends medieval
mythology with a modern era breathlessly. Definitely an original take
on Man vs Dragon. Now to get this straight, this is a film about
Humans, not about Dragons. The dragons merely supply the unique reason
for the apocalypse. This is a film about the post-apocalypse, not the
apocalypse. It's not about skies full of Dragons turning worldwide
armed forces into ash on an epic scale. It's not about Dragons setting
the world, quite literally, on fire. It's about after all that's
Which is a shame this was advertised as a film about Dragons burning all life as we know it. Of course, everyone goes in expecting to see 90 minutes of Dragons destroying everything. If this had been advertised as a more human film about after these Dragons have completely wasted everything, I really think this could've been seen as a good film. It unfortunately set expectations high in the wrong sort of viewers by a mind-blowingly epic trailer.
Christian Bale, Gerard Butler and Matthew McConaughey all deliver their role superbly, and the script isn't as bad as it's made out to be either. The effects were great and the Dragons do look pretty realistic, to the point I almost believed this was a documentary. Okay, so there are some plot holes, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to fill those in yourself. I mean, does everything have to be explained so obviously? The only reason this film gets 4 stars and not 5 is because, being a film about human struggle, it could've done with a bit more character development. Other than that, it's a deeply entertaining, well-acted, suspenseful film.
Don't knock it before you see it for yourself.
I think this is the best post-apocalyptic action film since The Road Warrior. Everything about it works: the story, the acting, the sets, the special effects. It amazes me that this film never found it's audience. I think it's fantastic.A really interesting take on the dragon myth. Something never seen before in a film. Unfortunately, that summer of 2002 all anyone could think about was the over hyped debut of "spider man." Such a shame, because this film beats it by a mile in terms of imagination on display. The sequence where men attempt to snare a dragon in mid-air is something that has never been seen before on-screen. Amazing and excellent stuff, pulled off with panache.
`Reign of Fire's' premise is simple: the world has been wiped out by airborne, fire-breathing dragons, who at first multiplied by the thousands but now themselves are starving and dying off. A few bands of people remain here and there trying to survive. Quinn (Christian Bale, with whiskers and glottal stops), who was on the scene as a boy in London when the first sleeping dragon awakened in a cave unearthed by an Underground project his mum was working on, leads a group of survivors in the north of England who're just trying to get a crop going for the next year and save a little mob of children. In comes Van Zan (Mathew McConaughey, with shaved head and brawny tattooed arms) leading an American helicopter crew. He's become a dragon slayer and since he's found there's only one male dragon left and it's somewhere around London, he's come to solicit aid. Quinn refuses. Van Zan pushes on to London without Quinn. They fail. He returns and begs Quinn to come as guide. What follows is the finale.
If you probe too deeply into the premise you're not going to have any fun, but fun is what this movie offers, glorious mindless fun and, above all, fabulous apocalyptic visuals of twisted metal, crepuscular landscapes, dark hulking ruins, and men crawling through them to fire off weapons at the evil birds, which look very graceful as they sweep through the skies and spurt out long expanding streams of fire. Shots are so stunningly composed you want them to freeze-frame. Within the dark end-of-the-world light there is amazing clarity. Working with Ridley Scott's cinematographer Adrian Biddle, X-Files director Rob Bowman has produced the best fantasy landscape this year next to `Lord of the Rings.' When Van Zan leads a hunt in the sky, it's like a computer game, and sometimes we see the game through the eyes of the dragon and it looks like a degraded digital film. However, it's not ingenuity of conception but sheer aesthetic appeal that makes the visuals of this movie so good.
The other large positive factor is the very solid, mostly English cast including a number of appealing youngsters led by Scott James Moutter as Jared, Quinn's adopted son, not to mention Bale, who brings a striking level of naturalness and conviction to his role as the sensitive, conscience-stricken Quinn. Bale's a foil to McConaughey's American macho militarist icon. McConaughey, whose finely chiseled face can be seen staring in mirrors in `Thirteen Conversations About One Thing,' is having a lark playing a brute here, but in the moments when he isn't shouting, he gives Van Zan almost as much conviction as Bale gives Quinn. Ladies are in short supply in this story: there's Alex (Izabella Scorupco) as Van Zan's helicopter pilot who winds up with Quinn, and for five minutes there's Alice Krige as young Quinn's mum. But since this movie's ideal audience might surely be young teenage boys, that's probably enough. Other things are lacking too, such as more variety in the dragons, more recognizable details of the wrecked London of the final scenes, some more colorful characters among Quinn's community, as in post-apocalyptic classics like `Mad Max.' But to say that is to miss the point, which is that this is a fast, exhilarating ride that's a feast for the eyes. If you want to view all this as a `B' horror picture, fine: just grant that it's a first-class version. To be seen, by all means, on a big screen, preferably in a big, old-time movie house.
The previews for this movie did not really interest or impress me at all.
In fact, I went to this movie only half-interested with a friend who claimed
that it would be a good movie. The PG rating worried me, and I was afraid
it would be another poorly done movie. I mean, dragons in the future??
However, the previews didn't really say anything about the great acting, touching scenes, and great overall story and concept. What a surprise this movie was! Matthew McConnaughy does a great job, and I could only really half-believe it was him through the whole movie! He plays such an interesting character ... and then the highly rated Christian Bale lives up to his previous acting job... a brilliant performance on his part.
I really was impressed with this movie. It's a wonderful post-apocalyptic movie that explains the demise of the dinosaurs, and brings a whole new element to the evolution and recycling of life on planet Earth. Everything in this movie was great, and sci-fi fantasy fans, you MUST SEE THIS MOVIE!!
A few complaints though, no nothing too bad really.. just nitpicky: 1) a poor directing decision on filming parts of the dragon's eyesight perspective; this kind of technique is shabby, but luckily, it was for only 2 quick shots. 2) They should have explained how the tanks and helicopters get their fuel. 3) The end line was a little silly, something to do with evolution? Huh? 4) Where did all the female dragons go at the end? They just seem to dissapear... maybe an extra 2 minute scene there could have helped to explain the final demise of the dragons.
Overall, this movie is a winner! I'd rate it a solid 8/10 or so! See it! Finally, a post-apocalypse movie that is original, believeable, and doesn't have Kevin Costner in it!!!
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Reign of Fire is a must see movie for its special effects and computer graphic dragons. The plot is wacky because of the theory the dinosaurs were killed by dragons. The actors are perfect for their roles and did a fine job. In London, an underground tunnel digging operation hits a cave containing the long dormant dragons. This causes the dragons to awake and spread all over the world. They burn everything in their path. The Earth is broiled and the dragons formed a dictatorship. All surviving organisms hide. Quinn is the leader of a small hiding community. His leadership comes to question when Americans show at their door. Big, grizzly Van Zan tells his story of being a dragonslayer, and Quinn lets them stay. Van Zan has a theory that there is only one male and it is living in London. He wants an army to help him kill the male and save the world. The computer graphics and special effects are awesome. Some movies have big dragons and little wings that somehow make it fly, but Reign of Fire's dragons have huge wingspan. The dragons look spectacular. Van Zan's leap into the dragon is the most exciting part of the movie. I think the director is combining fantasy and future to make the audience think that anything is possible. Bizarre things are going to happen in the future, but I do not think dragons are going to take over the world.
In 2002, London. A group of workers on a new tube tunnel unleash a dragon
from it's slumber. The end result is the destruction of much of the world
and massive loss of life. Twenty years later humans live in small
communities trying to survive the best they can as they hope the dragons
will eventually starve without human cities to feast on. Quinn leads one
such group until a group of US ex-soldiers turn up, led by Van Zan, who have
more of a mind to fight back.
To enjoy this film you need to get over two big obstacles. First of all the poster it's not for this film, it's for the prequel which I hope they plan to make. The poster shows dragons over a burning London and lots of helicopters all over the place. Basically it's a summer FX movie. However the film itself jumps this destruction and goes straight to the future, only telling us what happened through cheap footage etc. This is a big step as it's a real downer to not be allowed to see what happens when the dragon is freed when we had the `2020' caption I was like `what the ..'. However this can be got over as the second half of the film is very good and has some good effects and good action (even if it never delivers on the poster).
The second obstacle is that it's silly and doesn't make sense. Once you accept that it's full of holes then you can sit back and enjoy it more. If you watch it and complain about plot holes then you're missing the point. For example how come the dragons don't come and attack this fortress regularly, where does all this fuel keep coming from etc etc. But then again lets not forget that dragons aren't real either!
Like I said, the plot takes a while to get going. It's hard to watch Quinn's group in a damp castle when you know you SHOULD be seeing dragons rip into the world's cities. However when Van Zan turns up it gets a lot better and the action is good. The actual climax is also logically very weak but is very exciting and has a real nice touch plot wise.
Bale is good and is not as muscley as the Americans. He actually turned up having not worked out because he assumed that the characters would all be malnourished. But when he saw McConaughey he decided to bulk up a bit. McConaughey is really good as the pumped American. He is a bit OTT but really that's what this sort of film needs. Support is pretty bland which leaves the dragons. Sadly the dragons themselves are pretty empty bad guys. Because we never see them destroy the world their power is never feared. In later scenes this is done better but they are never more than big monsters (whereas Jurassic Park's monsters had character and threat).
Overall it took time to get going and it never lives up to the marketing hype but it's still enjoyable. Once you get past the two obstacles then you're free to enjoy the second half of the film and a really enjoyable climax.
|Page 1 of 57:||          |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||Newsgroup reviews||External reviews|
|Parents Guide||Official site||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|